Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis

Albine Moser, Irene Korstjens, Albine Moser, Irene Korstjens

Abstract

In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By 'novice' we mean Master's students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. The second article focused on context, research questions and designs, and referred to publications for further reading. This third article addresses FAQs about sampling, data collection and analysis. The data collection plan needs to be broadly defined and open at first, and become flexible during data collection. Sampling strategies should be chosen in such a way that they yield rich information and are consistent with the methodological approach used. Data saturation determines sample size and will be different for each study. The most commonly used data collection methods are participant observation, face-to-face in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Analyses in ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and content analysis studies yield different narrative findings: a detailed description of a culture, the essence of the lived experience, a theory, and a descriptive summary, respectively. The fourth and final article will focus on trustworthiness and publishing qualitative research.

Keywords: General practice/family medicine; analysis; data collection; general qualitative designs and methods; sampling.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

References

    1. Moser A, Korstjens I.. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 1: Introduction. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017;23:271–273.
    1. Korstjens I, Moser A.. Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 2: Context, research questions and designs. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017;23:274–279.
    1. Polit DF, Beck CT.. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 10th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2017.
    1. Moser A, van der Bruggen H, Widdershoven G.. Competency in shaping one’s life: Autonomy of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a nurse-led, shared-care setting; A qualitative study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2006;43:417–427.
    1. Moser A, Korstjens I, van der Weijden T, et al. . Patient’s decision making in selecting a hospital for elective orthopaedic surgery. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010;16:1262–1268.
    1. Bonevski B, Randell M, Paul C, et al. . Reaching the hard-to-reach: a systematic review of strategies for improving health and medical research with socially disadvantaged groups. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:42.
    1. Brinkmann S, Kvale S.. Interviews. Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. 3rd ed. London (UK): Sage; 2014.
    1. Kruger R, Casey M.. Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2015.
    1. Kallio H, Pietilä AM, Johnson M, et al. . Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. J Adv Nurs. 2016;72:2954–2965.
    1. Salmons J. Qualitative online interviews. 2nd ed London (UK): Sage; 2015.
    1. Elo S, Kyngäs A.. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62:107–115.
    1. Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health. 2010;23:334–340.
    1. Korstjens I, Moser A.. Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018;24 DOI:10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe